|
Comrade Gorbash posted:This is definitely an area where unclear, vague guidelines work just fine. Definitely. The United States got along for nearly 200 years without official rules for succession, aside from the Tyler rule (IE if the President dies, the VP becomes president.) Incapacity was not really treated. In the late 1950s, Eisenhower had that stroke - heart attack? - and Nixon took over the job, for all intents and purposes, but was still the VP. Nixon by all accounts did an excellent job, but in an age of nuclear strikes, the congress and the senate finally worked out official succession rules. Interesting note: the constitutional amendment , the 25th, that made these changes is one (not terribly likely) method of Trump removal. If Trump was judged incapable by a majority of his cabinet and his VP, power is shifted to the VP (or whoever is next in line.) The matter is then tossed to Congress, though the President can write a letter stating (yes I did survive the nuclear attack) or (there's a scary dog outside and he keeps looking at me, I can no longer discharge the duties of office.) chitoryu12 posted:The people who developed the Madman Theory apparently never predicted an actual madman being in control. Um hello the "madman theory" was all about "I'm not rational, I'm an unstable rear end in a top hat, you had best make me happy". (Pretty much North Korea's textbook method.) Game theory, on the other hand, searingly true. The past 50 or so years has been very unkind to the notion all humans are fundamentally rational, even rational psychopaths. Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Nov 14, 2017 |
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
One last picture of polymorphic Soviet madness: I'm the lack of forward visibility in any direction other than directly ahead
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
GotLag posted:One last picture of polymorphic Soviet madness: Forward is only direction that matters comrade
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Zamboni Apocalypse posted:However can you justify the continued glorification of these horrific weapons? Historic or necessary, they all lead down the path of knife crime, that scourge upon our fair isle! And *producing* the vile implements locally, both allowing for the possibility of loss or theft, and training others in the ways of making contraband weaponry - I shudder at the very thought!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AdamWeinstein/status/929926057200939008
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Jesus new world record.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
The comparison to Gorshkov makes sense: Why Dönitz, though? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
So, if you had an exorbitantly expensive sword, and you're fighting another guy with an exorbitantly expensive sword, are you going to pick up all sorts of chips and dents and whatnot?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
How big is your penknife? What the heck are you whittling that a three inch blade won't cut it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
bewbies posted:So, if you had an exorbitantly expensive sword, and you're fighting another guy with an exorbitantly expensive sword, are you going to pick up all sorts of chips and dents and whatnot? possibly; the sword might even break. source: i have a moderately expensive sword
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
Marxist-Jezzinist posted:How big is your penknife? What the heck are you whittling that a three inch blade won't cut it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:possibly; the sword might even break. For god sake don't use it Additional question: can you parry with the blade or only the flat
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:i am about to go to england to give a talk on historical handwriting, and either i check my goddamn tiny overnight bag or i don't bring my writing supplies. Because of my freaking penknife. UK weapons laws suck. I think if the blade is less than 3 inches and possibly non locking you're fine?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:it's got a handle about one and a half times the length of my finger and a short, curved, very sharp blade. this is legal? Is your pen knife actually a sickle?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:it's got a handle about one and a half times the length of my finger and a short, curved, very sharp blade. this is legal? If it can fold without locking then a very sharp blade of less than three inches is fine. Very few knives are illegal to own (pretty much just butterfly knives) but what you can carry in public is pretty strict.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Yeah the law is basically that you can't carry around large knives in public. Because you don't need to carry around large knives in public. Sorry you can't bring your messer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
zoux posted:For god sake don't use it You absolutely can parry with the edge, and if anything that's the preferred method. It allows you to exert much more force on your opponent's weapon, meaning you have an easier time of levering it into an advantageous position, and you're less likely to have yours pushed away. And if you've only got a simple crossbar as your handguard, parrying with the flat runs the risk of getting your hand hit. Basically, it boils down to this: Yes, your sword is gonna get damaged, but in the grand scheme of things that's not a huge deal. Any damage it receives is unlikely to make a difference in the fight you're currently in, and it can often be repaired. At the end of the day, it's far better to have a notch in your sword than a notch in your skull. Perestroika fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Nov 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
At the other end of the spectrum https://twitter.com/abc13houston/status/903791617793982468
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:You absolutely can parry with the edge
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
zoux posted:For god sake don't use it
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:the edges of the swords rubbing against each other are sticky and slow Surely only after the fight is over? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Is your pen knife actually a sickle? the shape is so you can make a curved cut on the quill while you are sharpening to get the nib shaped properly
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
So, can you fix your priceless katana/rapier/broadsword in most cases? I guess I don't really have a very good handle on how often they were used and how fragile they were/weren't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:it's a rapier, it is primarily edge I meant in general.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
bewbies posted:So, can you fix your priceless katana/rapier/broadsword in most cases? I guess I don't really have a very good handle on how often they were used and how fragile they were/weren't. If you can afford a sword you can afford to have it reground if you nick it up a bit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
GotLag posted:One last picture of polymorphic Soviet madness: It's the same as all edit: i r dumb
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Also note that aside from odd birds like the katana, which ideally delivers the killing blow on the draw, and cavalry sabers, which similarly are meant to run up on a guy and slice his skull in half, swords don't need to be all that sharp, just sharp enough to do the job. More cleaver than fillet knife. Cavalry sabers especially -- it's not a three-foot razor, it's an 8"-12" razor on the pointy end, the middle 12" or so is maybe axe-sharp or a little less, and the bottom third is like a dull axe if it's sharpened at all. Parry with the bit nearest the handle, hack at people in the melee with the middle bit, slice off faces/limbs with the tip. And rapiers are mostly for stabbin', I'd be surprised if some didn't use the saber model with just the tip sharp. Then you got your smallswords which are meant entirely for stabbin' and have a triangular cross-section and sometimes no edge to speak of, just a corner of the triangle facing forward. And then there was poo poo like the 1796 heavy cav sword, which was meant for thrusting but had a tip entirely unsuited for it, and was often field-modified to make it more stabby. And the 1796 light cav saber, which the French tried to get declared a war crime because it was so good at hacking limbs off. I have a couple of swords that my grandfather brought back from his WWII service:  He was an Army truck driver -- his brush with fame was that one time he drove a Jeep with MacArthur in the back -- so he probably won 'em off a Marine in a poker game. The Type 32 infantry NCO saber (the cavalry version was 3" longer) is a delightful little sword. The officer's katana is sharp as gently caress and has the maker's name on the tang, not stamped out in a factory like the NCO ones, though nobody can quite make out what it says, and a family crest on the pommel. (Oh, and before y'all start making jokes -- I am in no way one of those ppl who worships the HANZO STEEL. I just inherited a couple of cool swords that happen to be Japanese.) It's very pretty though.  Also there's a rather large notch in the top of one of my grandparents' dining-room chairs that I accidentally made with one of those when I was a kid. Don't play with swords indoors. Edit: Also there's eight drat layers in the katana's guard. No wonder they lost the war, wasting time and money on this poo poo and building pistols with the sear on the outside. 
Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Nov 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:07
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
bewbies posted:So, can you fix your priceless katana/rapier/broadsword in most cases? I guess I don't really have a very good handle on how often they were used and how fragile they were/weren't. I mean, all weapons were to some degree disposable, if you're actually fighting with them If you're cutting/stabbing into bone and parrying other weapons and hitting armor, then that poo poo's gonna break (or at the very least, get blunted) at some point. But you had to do what you had to do. Your sword breaking isn't a big deal as long as the other guy is dead and you're still standing. Sometimes you might have to drop your sword or throw it at someone so you can get away. poo poo happens. If you were a super wealthy aristocrat, then the issue of paying for expensive swords wasn't a problem for you. If you were a poorer soldier, then you probably weren't using a very expensive blade to begin with. Prices for various weapons also vary quite a bit depending on the time/place. A decent sword in 780 AD is probably much more expensive (relatively speaking) than a sword in 1450. By the later middle ages, you could pick up a cheap/used sword for a few pence. Even the price of a pretty good sword is basically nothing compared to the price of armor and horses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
bewbies posted:So, can you fix your priceless katana/rapier/broadsword in most cases? I guess I don't really have a very good handle on how often they were used and how fragile they were/weren't. Yes, you just regrind the blade. Over time, a well used sword will slowly lose material and eventually its time to get a new sword. You got a really expensive and fancy one because it would be higher quality, which would likely mean less likely to break, hold an edge better, and just to show off how rich you were. As a general rule, they were not used all that often. Swords were most often sidearms in war contexts. You went into battle with some kind of polearm like a spear, glaive, pollaxe, halberd etc, and a sword as a backup in case that gets knocked out of your hands, breaks, is damaged beyond use, etc. Swords used in civilian life for dueling or self defense also were not likely to be used all that much, same as self defense weapons today. Swordfights did not last all that long unless it was in some context where the combatants were not trying to kill one another or were fully armored. A fight to death was only a few exchanges and then someone is dead/dying. You might get a couple notches in your sword blade but if the other guy is dead, that is not a concern. As for the parrying question, as someone already said, there is a reason the crossguard on a sword is where it is, aligned with the edge. Its to catch an opponents sword that slides down the edge of your own blade before it hits your hand. Over time as the use of a shield or buckler along with a sword became less common, along with less use of gauntlets, you see swords develop more and more complex hilts that protect the hand more, culminating in basket hilted swords. As a sidenote, a difference between katanas and later european swords is a katana is more likely just to bend instead of break because of how they made, with the high quality steel welded to the edge of a lower quality, softer steel core. A high carbon steel blade will bend until it breaks and snap back into shape. A katana might bend more easily, which is bad, but can also be mostly bent back into shape, which is good, especially on campaign when a new sword might be harder to get, short of grabbing one off a dead guy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Also note that aside from odd birds like the katana, which ideally delivers the killing blow on the draw, and cavalry sabers, which similarly are meant to run up on a guy and slice his skull in half, swords don't need to be all that sharp, just sharp enough to do the job. More cleaver than fillet knife. My favorite analogy is that even if it has no edge at all, you’re still getting hit with a two or three foot long metal rod. It’s not going to feel good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Two hundred million goes into the black hole of military spending. Christ. That's enough for a new set of tires for an F-35!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Yes, you just regrind the blade. Over time, a well used sword will slowly lose material and eventually its time to get a new sword. [quote] I can't find it now, but I've seen slow-mo footage on youtube of a cavalry saber cutting through a watermelon at full charge. The thing just flops around up to 80 degrees bend, it's amazing what high-carbon steel with a spring temper can take. MrYenko posted:My favorite analogy is that even if it has no edge at all, you’re still getting hit with a two or three foot long metal rod. It’s not going to feel good. Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Nov 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Yes, you just regrind the blade. Over time, a well used sword will slowly lose material and eventually its time to get a new sword. You got a really expensive and fancy one because it would be higher quality, which would likely mean less likely to break, hold an edge better, and just to show off how rich you were.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Also note that aside from odd birds like the katana, which ideally delivers the killing blow on the draw, and cavalry sabers, which similarly are meant to run up on a guy and slice his skull in half, swords don't need to be all that sharp, just sharp enough to do the job. More cleaver than fillet knife. You are not wrong, but most swords would be quite sharp. Not all are razors yes, since that has a lot to do with the blade geometry, but you would cut your finger on drat near any proper sword. It all depends on the angle of the blade as it approaches the edge.The shallower that angle is, the finer of an edge that can be put on the sword, and the better it will cut, but that also means its more easily damaged, means the blade is more bendy and thus bad at thrusting, etc.  For single edged swords, they can often be sharper compared to the above cross sections as it can just be a wedge constantly tapering to one edge. Even big two handed swords from the 16th century were still sharp enough to slice you open, but yes they would not have edges comparable to a single edged Indian Tulwar. WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Nov 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:My favorite analogy is that even if it has no edge at all, you’re still getting hit with a two or three foot long metal rod. It’s not going to feel good. There's also the whole thing about how apparently cavalry sabres in the American Civil War often weren't actually sharpened by their users. The particular reasoning behind that is apparently something of a  , but the relevant takeaway was that even a wholly unsharpened sabre was extremely capable of loving you up, particularly if swung from a moving horse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:There's also the whole thing about how apparently cavalry sabres in the American Civil War often weren't actually sharpened by their users. The particular reasoning behind that is apparently something of a
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:could it be for a similar reason to the reports of English Civil War soldiers cutting brush with their swords--lack of daily experience with them? Also iirc their swords were incredibly lovely to start with so why not tbh? Edit: ECW dudes (that weren't officers buying their own) I mean. Early Modern governments were perennially broke af and the sword was a sidearm so of course they would procure the dollar store model. feedmegin fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
It's getting late so I'm not gonna dig the specific video, but Matt Easton did one on this topic. I think his core point was that they were issued blunt and only sharpened before action, so people started telling stories.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
My favourite sword sharpening story, the Prussian life guard heavy cavalry sneering and grinding their swords just outside the French embassy in 1805 just after Prussia declares war on Napoleonic France for the first time. You know, before the whole cluster gently caress that followed.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Um hello the "madman theory" was all about "I'm not rational, I'm an unstable rear end in a top hat, you had best make me happy". (Pretty much North Korea's textbook method.) The problem is that the madman theory is reliant on the person behind the wheel actually being rational and capable of exploiting their image to get what they want. Nixon intentionally cultivated the image of being irrational as a way of scaring the communist bloc, but wouldn't actually do something crazy for no good reason. In this case, we now have an actual madman in place, someone who's clearly suffering from some sort of mental deficiency and is well known for doing spiteful or casually cruel things without even needing a good reason. Especially after the retaliatory cruise missile attack on Syria (a nation that the United States was not only not at war with, but was not directly threatened by in any capacity), there now exists the possibility that Trump might do something he seriously can't take back. Hence why there's currently serious talks by Congress about limiting his ability to throw nukes around, along with talk of impeachment after less than a year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 00:04
|
|
